Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around March 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Maryfield Nursing Home during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to include key clinical issues in comprehensive care plans for several residents. Two residents receiving Eliquis for conditions such as atrial fibrillation and heart failure had ongoing anticoagulant therapy documented in orders, MARs, and MDS assessments, and one had a baseline care plan noting bleeding risk, yet neither resident’s comprehensive care plan contained goals or interventions related to anticoagulant use or monitoring for high-risk medications. Three other residents with documented bilateral hearing impairment and need for hearing aids had admission assessments, baseline care plans, and MDS/CAA data reflecting hearing loss and, in one case, a triggered communication care area, but their comprehensive care plans lacked any communication or hearing-related problem statements, goals, or interventions. Staff interviews confirmed that the MDS Coordinator routinely omitted hearing issues from care plans if residents could hear with aids, and leadership described relying on baseline care plans and standup meetings rather than ensuring these needs were integrated into the comprehensive care plans.
The facility failed to submit accurate PBJ data to CMS for Q3 2024, showing no RN hours or licensed nursing coverage for June. However, records indicated RN presence and coverage. The Payroll Manager, unaware of the issue until later, had corrected a related error after CMS acknowledgment.
Failure to Incorporate Anticoagulant and Hearing Needs into Comprehensive Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to develop individualized comprehensive care plans that addressed anticoagulant use and communication needs for multiple residents. For one resident with a pelvic fracture and atrial fibrillation, physician orders showed an ongoing Eliquis 5 mg twice daily order, and the baseline care plan identified a risk for bleeding due to anticoagulant use. The admission MDS confirmed anticoagulant use and intact cognition. However, the comprehensive care plan dated 6/20/25, last revised 2/26/26, did not carry over the baseline intervention regarding bleeding risk from anticoagulant therapy, and there was no focus area for anticoagulant use. The nurse mentor who completed the care plan and the DON both acknowledged that anticoagulant use should have been included and that its omission was an oversight. A second resident with diagnoses including long-term use of anticoagulants, atrial fibrillation, chronic systolic heart failure, and hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease had been receiving Eliquis 5 mg twice daily as documented on the MAR from August 2025 through March 2026. The annual and quarterly MDS assessments showed moderate cognitive impairment and anticoagulant use for heart failure. Despite this, the comprehensive care plan dated 2/9/2026 did not include any goals or interventions related to Eliquis or monitoring for high-risk medication use. The nurse mentor responsible for the care plan confirmed the resident was taking Eliquis and stated that, as a high-risk medication, it should have been on the care plan but could not explain its absence. The DON and Administrator both stated they expected high-risk medications such as Eliquis to be included in the care plan but were unable to explain why it was not. The facility also failed to include communication and hearing-related needs in the comprehensive care plans for three residents with documented hearing impairment. One resident with congestive heart failure and respiratory failure had an admission assessment and baseline care plan indicating bilateral hearing impairment and the need for hearing aids, with the baseline stating the resident would be responsible for keeping up with the hearing aids. The MDS showed moderate cognitive impairment and adequate hearing with hearing aids. However, the comprehensive care plan dated 2/15/26 contained no communication-related care areas or interventions. Observations showed the resident often did not have hearing aids in place, could not reach them independently, and had difficulty hearing staff unless aids were in and staff were close. The MDS Coordinator stated she did not include hearing on the comprehensive care plan if a resident could hear with hearing aids, and the DON indicated she would not expect impaired hearing to be in the regular care plan for an alert and oriented resident, instead relying on standup meetings to communicate such needs. Two additional residents with heart disease, surgical aftercare for a right knee, and COPD respectively had admission assessments and baseline care plans documenting impaired hearing in both ears and a need for hearing aids, though the baseline care plans for these residents did not specify hearing aid use. Their MDS assessments indicated either intact cognition or moderate cognitive impairment, with adequate or minimally impaired hearing when using hearing aids. For both residents, the comprehensive care plans contained no communication or hearing-related care areas or interventions. For one of these residents, the CAA summary documented that communication was a triggered care area due to some hearing loss even with hearing aids and explicitly stated that communication would be addressed in the care plan, yet it was not. The MDS Coordinator confirmed she completed these care plans and reiterated that she did not include hearing on the comprehensive care plan if the resident could hear with hearing aids. The DON and Administrator provided differing expectations about when impaired hearing should appear on the comprehensive care plan, but both acknowledged reliance on baseline care plans and standup meetings rather than ensuring communication needs were incorporated into the comprehensive care plans.
Inaccurate PBJ Submission for RN Hours and Coverage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to submit accurate payroll data on the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) report to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the third quarter of 2024, specifically regarding Registered Nurse (RN) hours and licensed nursing coverage. The PBJ report indicated that there were no RN hours and no licensed nursing coverage for the entire month of June 2024. However, a review of the Posted Daily Nursing Staffing Forms, Daily Staffing Sheet, and nursing staff time detail reports for June 2024 showed that there was an RN on site for at least 8 hours a day every 24 hours, and there was licensed nursing coverage at the facility 24 hours a day. During an interview, the Payroll Manager, who had been in her position for five years, stated that she regularly input data into the PBJ without issues and did not recall receiving any errors or doing anything differently. She later recalled receiving a rejection error after inputting data on the deadline, which was resolved after correcting an employee's hours. CMS acknowledged the correction, and the ticket was closed. The Payroll Manager was not aware of the missing hours for June until the time of the interview.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 248 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 5 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near High Point
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Shannon Gray Rehabilitation & Recovery Center | 0.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Meridian Center | 3.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 2 |
| Adams Farm Living & Rehabilitation | 3.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Westwood Health And Rehabilitation | 5 mi | ★★★★★ | 18 | 0 |
| Westchester Manor At Providence Place | 5.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Maryfield Nursing Home.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.